I am wondering if there will be an Amnesty Clause in the new CBA that will allow teams a one time Amnesty buyout of a player with out it affecting the salary cap. The NBA did this and some teams used it smartly to remove a bad contract from there books.

Could be very interesting because they pens could use it on one of the martin michlek combo. But you see a lot of other teams taking advantage of this. the Islanders with dieptro, the gionta deal rings a bell. The carter deal, heck if the byrzgolov deal.

I didn't bring this up in Pens related because it would just turn into a yeah lets dump martin thread, just wondering if anyone had any thoughts about this being included. Being as this is the first CBA negotiations since the cap was implemented i really can see this.

I hope hope hope they don't do this. You signed the dumbass deals, live with them. I just dont see it being fair IMO. Same thing with burying guys with huge cap hits in the minors ala Wade Redden. IF the Rangers couldnt bury him in the minors they would A) probably be over the cap as the team is currently constructed or B) Never been able to move enough salary to even make a play on Rick Nash as they did. The small market teams cant afford to just bury people in the minors, nor buy them outright if they have a bad deal on their books, necessarily.

I think its crap. If I was an owner and my GM came to me and said he wanted to make use of this clause I'd tell him okay as long as he was ready to be fired, cause he just wasted 15 million of my dollars if the Pens buy out Paul Martin.

That is a intresting idea, but on thing players fought for and the NHL freely gave them was guarenteed contracts. You get paid no matter what. Players would fight for this not to go through.

But i agree with the other poster, the GMs try to sign players to these contracts and the owners agree to pay it, hold them to it. Look at Loungo, bet Vancouver is kicking themselves for that one. Now they are stuck unless they can somehow trade him, whick i think any team that picks up his contract combined with how bad he plays would be stupid.

mac5155 wrote:If it's in there.. I don't think it should be valid on past contracts. Maybe if they were signed after the new CBA

I think both the PA and Owners actually agree on this one. Both sides have struck this down repeatedly in the media ever since it was brought up. It offers unfair advantages to teams that have purposefully circumvented to cap and is virtually limitless in its scope.

The more loop holes you create the more the richer teams will take advantage of the cap structure. leaving the small market teams futher behind.

Also in the next CBA look for language that will define how you can structure contacts, the Kovalchuk type contract will be avoided. Upfront money and 3 dead years at the end. to lower the cap hit type contract.

I kind of find this amnesty clause kinda funny, its to protect big markets from themselves. They create these contracts then want protection if it doesn't work out. Make them pay for driving up salaries by paying marginal talent top teir prices.

The NFL doesn't have guarenteed contracts which allows them to sign a player and release them 2 years into a 5 year contract with no penalty.

Unless the new CBA allows this for just next season to destroy a contract to get under the new cap, but that player would then become a UFA and the team who dismissed his contract would lose him.

Luongo and Malone might be 2 guys in danger of losing their current deals if this was inplace.